DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-11 are currently pending and have been examined.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/06/2024 has been considered by the examiner and an initialed copy of the IDS is hereby attached.
The information disclosure statement filed 06/06/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. The foreign reference “CN 102510368” is cited on the IDS and the provided copy does not include a legible English translation. The translation is blurry and incomprehensible. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because of the informalities described below. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The figures on page 2 of the Drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84 because they depict illegible text. For example, the figures on page 2 depict text which is blurry and incomprehensible. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing legibly. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application.
All figures in the Drawings are objected to as none of the figures have been labeled and therefore it is unclear which figure is being referred to in the Specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing legibly. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 and 8 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites the acronym “PAPR” which has not been defined. All acronyms should be defined at their first instance in the claims.
Claims 1 and 8 should remove the word “required”.
Claim 2 recites the acronym “OFDM” which has not been defined. All acronyms should be defined at their first instance in the claims.
Claim 3 needs a space after the word “Claim” in “The method of Claim1”.
Claim 8 recites the word “decrease” which should recite “reduce” to provide consistency with claim 1.
Claim 8 recites the phrase “the formula I” which should recite “Formula 1”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the PAPR value" in "calculating amplitude and phase values required to reduce the PAPR value of the communication and radar total signals (503)". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as claim introduces “PAPR values” and therefore it is unclear what “the PAPR value” is referring to.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the communication and radar total signals" in "calculating amplitude and phase values required to reduce the PAPR value of the communication and radar total signals (503)". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the communication and radar signals" in "collecting the communication and radar signals and sending them to the channel by passing them through a power amplifier (505)". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the channel" in "collecting the communication and radar signals and sending them to the channel by passing them through a power amplifier (505)". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the radar" in "wherein the radar is monostatic or bistatic". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the radar" in "wherein the radar is a monostatic radar ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation, “assuming that all digital and analog operations necessary for the generation of the waveform in the communication signal block have been performed”. This limitation is unclear and indefinite as it is unclear whether the feature after the phrase “assuming” are part of the claimed invention. Furthermore the term “necessary” is a relative term where the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree of this term, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. This entire limitation should be re-written or entirely removed.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the communication signal block" in “assuming that all digital and analog operations necessary for the generation of the waveform in the communication signal block have been performed”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation, “assuming that all the necessary digital and analog operations have been performed in the radar signal block”. This limitation is unclear and indefinite as it is unclear whether the feature after the phrase “assuming” are part of the claimed invention. Furthermore the term “necessary” is a relative term where the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree of this term, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. This entire limitation should be re-written or entirely removed.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the radar signal block" in “assuming that all digital and analog operations necessary for the generation of the waveform in the communication signal block have been performed”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the process of calculating" in “the process of calculating (503) the amplitude and phase values required to decrease the PAPR value of the communication and radar total signals,”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the PAPR value" in "wherein the process of calculating (503) the amplitude and phase values required to decrease the PAPR value of the communication and radar total signals". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the communication and radar total signals" in wherein the process of calculating (503) the amplitude and phase values required to decrease the PAPR value of the communication and radar total signals". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the selected duration T". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the communication system" in “where T is the total symbol length in the communication system”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as a plurality of “communication systems” has been introduced.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the adjustment factor ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the amplitude and phase change ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the PAPR reduction-based adjustment block". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 8, the phrase "looking at the communication signal and using the formula I" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “looking at” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Regarding claim 8, the variables in Formula 1 have not been clearly defined in the claims nor the specification. It is unclear what these “values” are referring to nor do these “values” have any defined unit.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the PAPR reduction-based adjusted radar signal" in “and obtaining the communication signal and the PAPR reduction-based adjusted radar signal”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "them" in “by collecting them with the signal collector (204).”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as it is unclear what “them” is referring to.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the signal collector" in “by collecting them with the signal collector (204).”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the changes in the radar signal”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase "a different problem" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “different” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "it" in “wherein it is used to improve system performance in autonomous vehicles using simultaneous radar and communication signals”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as it is unclear what “it” is referring to.
All dependent claims are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to their dependency on a claim rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
EXAMINER’S NOTE
The claims at issue are replete with 112(b) errors which precludes proper prior art examination under merits as the metes and bounds of the invention are unclear. Inconsistent and relative terminology has been used in the claims throughout. The Examiner has provided a prior art rejection below based on the Examiner’s best understanding of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altintas et al. (US 20200174095 A1), hereinafter Altintas, in view of Bourdoux et al. (US 20200124700 A1), hereinafter Bourdoux.
Regarding claim 1, Altintas discloses [Note: what Altintas fails to clearly disclose is strike-through]
A method for reducing PAPR values in combination with radar and communication systems (see paragraph 0038, “The signal system described herein includes a signal module that modifies OFDM signals so that the modified OFDM signals (also referred to as “combination signals” as described below) use FMCW waveforms instead of OFDM waveforms. This modification helps solve the PAPR problem and makes OFDM signaling systems more suitable for both communication and radar applications in automobiles.”, further see paragraph 0040, “At least an advantage and improvement provided by the signal system described herein include that it makes a radar bandwidth (e.g., a radar bandwidth for FMCW) and a communication bandwidth (e.g., a communication bandwidth for OFDM) to be decoupled with one another. As a result, there is no need to generate OFDM signals with a high bandwidth to improve range resolution, thus avoiding high PAPR issues and problems created by the PAPR.”), the method comprising:
generating a communication signal (501) (see Fig. 2, generating a communication signal using wireless-signal generation module 204, further see paragraph 0098, “The wireless-signal generation module 204 can be software including routines for constructing a wireless signal such as an OFDM baseband signal.”);
generating a radar signal (502) (see Fig. 2, generating a radar signal using waveform generation module 206, further see paragraph 0103, “In some embodiments, the waveform generation module 206 generates an automotive-radar waveform that includes a series of chirps, with each chirp including a sinusoidal signal whose frequency changes linearly over time.”);
calculating amplitude and phase values required to reduce the PAPR value of the communication and radar total signals (503) (see paragraph 0110, “With reference to FIG. 7A, an example process 700 to generate the combination signal is illustrated. Specifically, the combination module 208 generates the combination signal by mixing the OFDM baseband signal with the FMCW waveform to generate the combination signal. For example, the combination module 208 performs one or more of the following operations: mixing the analog signal Re{s(t)} of the OFDM baseband signal with the FMCW waveform to generate a first mixed signal; shifting a phase of the FMCW waveform by 90 degrees and mixing the analog signal Im{s(t)} of the OFDM baseband signal with the phase-shifted FMCW waveform to generate a second mixed signal; and combining the first mixed signal with the second mixed signal to generate the combination signal.”, where mixing the analog signal of the OFDM with the FMCW waveform to generate the mixed signal is indeed “calculating amplitude values” and the shifting of the phase of the FMCW waveform is indeed “calculating phase values” and these steps are used to generate the combination signal to reduce the PAPR value, see supporting paragraph 0038, “The signal system described herein includes a signal module that modifies OFDM signals so that the modified OFDM signals (also referred to as “combination signals” as described below) use FMCW waveforms instead of OFDM waveforms. This modification helps solve the PAPR problem and makes OFDM signaling systems more suitable for both communication and radar applications in automobiles.”);
adjusting the radar signal with the calculated amplitude and phase values (504) (see paragraph 0110, “With reference to FIG. 7A, an example process 700 to generate the combination signal is illustrated. Specifically, the combination module 208 generates the combination signal by mixing the OFDM baseband signal with the FMCW waveform to generate the combination signal. For example, the combination module 208 performs one or more of the following operations: mixing the analog signal Re{s(t)} of the OFDM baseband signal with the FMCW waveform to generate a first mixed signal; shifting a phase of the FMCW waveform by 90 degrees and mixing the analog signal Im{s(t)} of the OFDM baseband signal with the phase-shifted FMCW waveform to generate a second mixed signal; and combining the first mixed signal with the second mixed signal to generate the combination signal.”, the combination signal is generated by adjusting the radar signal with the calculated amplitude and phase values); and
collecting the communication and radar signals and sending them to the channel (see paragraph 0115, “The combination module 208 transmits the combination signal to an intended recipient. For example, the combination module 208 transmits the combination signal via the transmitter 193.”).
Bourdoux discloses,
collecting the communication and radar signals and sending them to the channel by passing them through a power amplifier (see Fig. 3, power amplifier 110, further see paragraph 0044, “FIG. 1 shows a block diagram of an OFDM based radar 100 for the detection of the speed and range of remote objects by transmitting OFDM based radar signals 113 and receiving the reflected radar signals 114…Radar 100 further comprises a power amplifier, PA, 110 for amplifying the radar signal 109 to an amplified radar signal 111 which, on its turn, is transmitted as a wireless radar signal 113 by an antenna 112.”, further see paragraph 0081, “According to an embodiment, the additional degree of freedom may further be exploited to minimize the peak-to-average-power-ratio, PAPR. Achieving a low PAPR is crucial in wireless and radar transmissions since it relaxes the power amplifier's 110 back-off requirements and allows working closer to saturation thereby increasing the detection range and improving the PA's 110 power efficiency.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Bourdoux into the invention of Altintas. Both references are considered close pertinent art to the claimed invention as they both disclose radar and OFDM communication systems to lower PAPR values. Bourdoux discloses the feature of transmitting the outgoing signal through a power amplifier. Such a feature is well-known in the art of radar and communication systems. The combination would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to boot signal power levels to increase range resolution and accuracy in data detection.
Regarding claim 2, Altintas further discloses
The method of Claim 1, wherein OFDM waveform is used for communication (see Fig. 2, generating a communication signal using wireless-signal generation module 204, further see paragraph 0098, “The wireless-signal generation module 204 can be software including routines for constructing a wireless signal such as an OFDM baseband signal.”).
Regarding claim 3, Altintas further discloses
The method of Claim 1, wherein linear continuous wave (LCW) form is used for radar (see Fig. 2, generating a radar signal using waveform generation module 206, further see paragraph 0103, “In some embodiments, the waveform generation module 206 generates an automotive-radar waveform that includes a series of chirps, with each chirp including a sinusoidal signal whose frequency changes linearly over time.”).
Regarding claim 4, Altintas further discloses
The method of Claim 1, wherein the radar is monostatic or bistatic (Fig. 1A depicts a monostatic radar configuration).
Regarding claim 5, Altintas further discloses
The method of Claim 4, wherein the radar is a monostatic radar (Fig. 1A depicts a monostatic radar configuration).
Regarding claim 6, Altintas further discloses
The method of Claim 1, wherein in step 501, the communication signal is denoted by x(t), assuming that all digital and analog operations necessary for the generation of the waveform in the communication signal block have been performed (see Fig. 2, generating a communication signal using wireless-signal generation module 204, further see paragraph 0098, “The wireless-signal generation module 204 can be software including routines for constructing a wireless signal such as an OFDM baseband signal.”).
Regarding claim 7, Altintas further discloses
The method of Claim 1, wherein in step 502, the radar signal is denoted by c(t), assuming that all the necessary digital and analog operations have been performed in the radar signal block (see Fig. 2, generating a radar signal using waveform generation module 206, further see paragraph 0103, “In some embodiments, the waveform generation module 206 generates an automotive-radar waveform that includes a series of chirps, with each chirp including a sinusoidal signal whose frequency changes linearly over time.”).
Regarding claim 8, Altintas further discloses
The method of Claim 1, wherein the process of calculating (503) the amplitude and phase values required to decrease the PAPR value of the communication and radar total signals, and adjusting (504) the radar signal with the calculated amplitude and phase values (see paragraph 0110, “With reference to FIG. 7A, an example process 700 to generate the combination signal is illustrated. Specifically, the combination module 208 generates the combination signal by mixing the OFDM baseband signal with the FMCW waveform to generate the combination signal. For example, the combination module 208 performs one or more of the following operations: mixing the analog signal Re{s(t)} of the OFDM baseband signal with the FMCW waveform to generate a first mixed signal; shifting a phase of the FMCW waveform by 90 degrees and mixing the analog signal Im{s(t)} of the OFDM baseband signal with the phase-shifted FMCW waveform to generate a second mixed signal; and combining the first mixed signal with the second mixed signal to generate the combination signal.”) comprise the steps of:
obtaining radar signal segments by dividing the radar signal of the selected duration T into N segments, where T is the total symbol length in the communication system (see paragraph 0110 above and Fig. 7C which depicts that generation of the combination signal using signal segments)
calculating the adjustment factor, which expresses the amplitude and phase change to each radar and signal segment, by the PAPR reduction-based adjustment block (see paragraph 0110 above and Fig. 7C which depicts that generation of the combination signal using signal segments).
Regarding claim 9, Altintas further discloses
The method of Claim 8, wherein the changes in the radar signal are used to solve a different problem in radar and communication systems (see paragraph 0108-0109, “In some embodiments, the combination module 208 is operable to combine the wireless signal with the automotive-radar waveform to generate a combination signal for the integrated automotive radar and communication application so that a radar bandwidth for the automotive-radar waveform is decoupled from a communication bandwidth for the wireless signal… For example, the wireless signal includes an OFDM baseband signal, the automotive-radar waveform includes an FMCW waveform, and the combination signal includes an OFDM signal that includes a multi-carrier modulated FMCW waveform. The FMCW waveform has a larger bandwidth and a lower peak to average power ratio than a standard OFDM waveform.”).
Regarding claim 10, Altintas further discloses
The method of Claim 9, wherein changes in the radar signal are used to reduce the out-of-band emission (OOBE) of radar and communication systems (see paragraph 0040, “At least an advantage and improvement provided by the signal system described herein include that it makes a radar bandwidth (e.g., a radar bandwidth for FMCW) and a communication bandwidth (e.g., a communication bandwidth for OFDM) to be decoupled with one another. As a result, there is no need to generate OFDM signals with a high bandwidth to improve range resolution, thus avoiding high PAPR issues and problems created by the PAPR”, where decoupling the radar and OFDM signal band widths “reduce the out-of-band emission (OOBE) of radar and communication systems”, further see paragraph 0086, “At least one benefit of mixing the OFDM baseband signal with the FMCW waveform to generate the combination signal includes: decoupling the radar bandwidth for the FMCW waveform and the communication bandwidth for the OFDM baseband signal. For example, when the radar bandwidth (e.g., the bandwidth of the FMCW waveform) and the communication bandwidth (e.g., the bandwidth of the OFDM baseband signal) are decoupled with one another, the radar bandwidth can be increased to improve range resolution with no need to increasing the communication bandwidth. In this case, it is easier to generate a signal with a large bandwidth for radar processing when compared with an OFDM radar. There is no need to generate an OFDM signal with a high bandwidth to improve range resolution, thus avoiding issues associated with a high peak to average power ratio (PAPR).”).
Regarding claim 11, Altintas further discloses
The method of Claim 1, wherein it is used to improve system performance in autonomous vehicles using simultaneous radar and communication signals (see paragraph 0048, “In some embodiments, the vehicle 123 may include an autonomous vehicle or a semi-autonomous vehicle. For example, the vehicle 123 may include an Advanced Driver-Assistance System (ADAS system). The ADAS system may provide some or all of the functionality that provides autonomous functionality.”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
RAVENSCROFT et al. (US 20210208237 A1) is considered close pertinent art to the claimed invention as it discloses a joint radar and OFDM communication system optimizing PAPR values (see paragraph 0069, “As shown above, the system 100 of FIG. 1 and the method 1300 of FIG. 13 provide a new technique, referred to herein as PE-THoRaCs, for creating dual-function radar and communication waveforms. The PE-THoRaCs techniques disclosed herein, by virtue of the above-described two-stage optimization process, are configured to produce constant-amplitude pulsed radar waveforms with favorable delay/Doppler ambiguity properties that additionally contain OFDM subcarriers capable of achieving data rates on the order of Mb/s…This manner of OFDM implementation may also prove useful to achieve communication-only waveforms with PAPR=0 dB, which may facilitate new transmission capability for some technologies, such as base stations (e.g., evolved Node bs (eNBs), next generation Node bs (gNBs), and the like) and other devices operating in OFDM-based communication networks.”).
Yun et al. (US 7340006 B2) is considered close pertinent art to the claimed invention as it discloses an apparatus and method to reduce PAPR values in an OFDM communication system (see Fig. 5).
Levin et al. (US 20020003488 A1) is considered close pertinent art to the claimed invention as it discloses a vehicle communication utilizing OFDM and radar communications (see Figs. 5 and 6).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAZRA N. WAHEED whose telephone number is (571)272-6713. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8 AM - 4:30 PM).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571)270-5144. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NAZRA NUR WAHEED/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights